On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Do we really need to support dml or pg_dump for individual partitions? > > I think we do. It's quite reasonable for a DBA (or developer or > whatever) to want to dump all the data that's in a single partition; > for example, maybe they have the table partitioned, but also spread > across several servers. When the data on one machine grows too big, > they want to dump that partition, move it to a new machine, and drop > the partition from the old machine. That needs to be easy and > efficient. > > More generally, with inheritance, I've seen the ability to reference > individual inheritance children be a real life-saver on any number of > occasions. Now, a new partitioning system that is not as clunky as > constraint exclusion will hopefully be fast enough that people don't > need to do it very often any more. But I would be really cautious > about removing the option. That is the equivalent of installing a new > fire suppression system and then boarding up the emergency exit. > Yeah, you *hope* the new fire suppression system is good enough that > nobody will ever need to go out that way any more. But if you're > wrong, people will die, so getting rid of it isn't prudent. The > stakes are not quite so high here, but the principle is the same. >
Sure, I don't feel we should not provide anyway to take dump for individual partition but not at level of independent table. May be something like --table <table_name> --partition <partition_name>. In general, I think we should try to avoid exposing that partitions are individual tables as that might hinder any future enhancement in that area (example if we someone finds a different and better way to arrange the partition data, then due to the currently exposed syntax, we might feel blocked). With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
